Unity 3 brings very expensive dev tools at a very low price

Unity is a favorite of indie game developers, and today's release of version 3 …

Indie game development tool Unity got a big update today with version 3. Unity is well known for its use in mobile Web and 3D mobile game development, but this new release brings some desktop and console graphics features usually only seen in more expensive high-end development packages like UDK.

Unity 3 also adds Android support, although it's still undergoing polishing. Unity remains free for commercial use for Web and desktop game development and Unity Pro remains $1,500 per seat.

It has been a good month for the people at Unity. Apple recently loosened restrictions on the use of cross-compilers for iOS development, which was aimed at Flash, but also caught a lot of fish like mono-based Unity in the net. Then Unity won The Wall Street Journal 2010 Technology Innovation Award for software. The year looks good for Unity users as well—the company plans a free upgrade to version 3 that integrates Allegorithmic's Substance, a powerful procedural texture generation tool. If you're an existing Unity user, it's hard to find a reason not to upgrade.

"Unity remains free for commercial use for Web and desktop game development and Unity Pro remains $1,500 per seat."

Shouldn't it say free for NON-COMMERICIAL use?

I might be wrong, can't check right now because I'm at work, but I don't think that is a typo. I think when you get the Pro version you get extra stuff like the ability to make IPhone games, and when you get the normal version you can only make web and desktop games. I think the pro also has more built in options for lighting and such. Again I could be wrong I'll have to check when I get off work.

I'm going to have to give Unity another look. I've been dabbling about with open source projects for a while now. Panda3d and Horde3d have topped the list. I never managed to get interested in Ogre3d. With the new Blender 2.5 I've finally come to respect it as a viable modeling program. Unfortunately, getting content from Blender to all 3 of the engines mentioned above is a challenge. It seems to be easiest to do with Panda, but then connecting a physics engine to it becomes a complete pain. Unity seems to have better documentation, but I haven't bothered to learn it yet.

I'm developing an indie game so this sort of news is of great interest to me. It's a racing game that blends Need For Speed with Mario Kart. So far I have a car ready to go and have been looking for an engine to use that isn't as convoluted as XNA seemed. I'm determined to show the world that one person can develop a polished fun single and multi-player game. I want to debut the game at a LAN party I visit. While I hunt for a viable engine I've been doing more modeling and even learning to make music. I have an older version of Unity and will do some more research on this new version. =)

SofaKing wrote:

Is this a typo:

"Unity remains free for commercial use for Web and desktop game development and Unity Pro remains $1,500 per seat."

Shouldn't it say free for NON-COMMERICIAL use?

No, that is not a typo. Last time I checked you could use the free version of Unity as long as your net income was under $100,000 on a commercial game. Once you broke that threshold then you had to buy the pro edition.

"Unity remains free for commercial use for Web and desktop game development and Unity Pro remains $1,500 per seat."

Shouldn't it say free for NON-COMMERICIAL use?

Best I can see from following the link in the article, no. I do not see any limitation on the use of the free version, or a requirement for a run-time license.

If you follow the link, there are two versions, the base version Unity (free), and their top of the line Unity Pro ($1500). And several (not free) addons for iOS and Android. So if you are targeting iOS, you would pay at least a few bucks.

They base version looks like you could create a lot with it, and certainly get a feel for how well it will work. They offer 30-day free trials of the pro version. The free version is a download, so costs them very little to try it. If you like it, and you are seriously developing for commercial sale, you would probably find the cost of the Pro version worthwhile. Or if you are targeting mobile, you would likely pay a few bucks for their addons.

The main difference between Unity and Unity Pro is the featureset. Unity lacks shadows, shaders, etc. - stuff you'd need for a serious game.

Unity's business model is to charge developers, at $1,500 per dev (+ a lot more for additional features like iPhone support, asset server, etc.). If you use Unity seriously that's what you'll end up paying - the free Unity is just to introduce you to the tool and let you try it out, really. Otherwise, Unity would go out of business. Period.

For this reason I am skeptical of Unity. How many indie game studios are there, that make a healthy profit? Not that many. So I suspect Unity is basing itself on the same model as the iPhone - very few people actually make money off apps there, but a lot pay in order to try. With the iPhone the fee isn't that big, though (unless you don't already have a Mac - then it's comparable to the expensiveness of Unity).

I'm developing an indie game so this sort of news is of great interest to me. It's a racing game that blends Need For Speed with Mario Kart.

That seems to be popular right now. Aside from Blur, I know of another student indie game also doing a similar concept.

Don't take that as meaning you shouldn't do yours. Originality most often comes in all the fine details, not the grand concept. Halo, Unreal, Quake, CoD, and Bioshock are all first person shooters yet they are entirely different games.

Quote:

I'm determined to show the world that one person can develop a polished fun single and multi-player game.

Hate to break this to you, but the world already knows this. Look at many of the IGF and IGC entries, especially in the student categories. Many of those games were done by very small teams, most ranging from 1-4 people.

Closure was done by a single kid before he even entered college. World of Goo was done by just two people. The team that did Portal was hired out of DigiPen based on their junior-project game, Narbacular Drop (same concept as Portal, just was less polished, and a different story). Likewise, Portal 2 is being worked on by the original Portal team and the DigiPen student team that did Tag. Another DigiPen team did Gear, which won the grand prize at IGC last year in the student/hobbyist bracket ($100k). Keep in mind that the DigiPen teams don't get to use any kind of pre-written engine at all, period; they write the entire game from scratch in C/C++. All over the course of a single school year, while taking 12-18 cr-hrs/semester. And they're (usually) only 3-4 people.

The world knows that a single guy can make a polished, fun game. The world knows that a very small time in a very tight schedule can make an even better polished, fun game. And the world knows that a large team of professionals can produce games that no hobbyist will ever replicate from scratch, e.g. Mass Effect 2.

Again, this is not to dishearten you. I just don't want you going into a project for the wrong reason. If all you want to do is prove something, you've already failed. Make a game because you really want to make that game, because you believe in the game, because you think it will be fun and bring joy to others, and don't care about or compare it with other games made by bigger teams.

I modded games (warcraft3, sc2, many smaller engines) for years and transitioned to unity3D after playing with the UDK and cryengine2. Haven't gone back, the indie (free) has been extremely easy and fun for me to use. I'm making a procedurally (terrain, buildings, towns) generated zombie survival based in the 1800s, aside from graphics there isn't a single thing I don't think I can't do with time. It's incredibly well documented, and the community is one of the nicest I've met.

Activating 3.0 is a bit poor right now, as their servers are swamped with requests. Find a 2.6 download or wait till tomorrow if you want to try Unity.

EDIT: You're allowed to sell games made with the indie version until..your income passes $100,000.00There are a few other restrictions, but that's the main one related to pricing. Pretty extreme.

The main difference between Unity and Unity Pro is the featureset. Unity lacks shadows, shaders, etc. - stuff you'd need for a serious game.).

Lightmaps, shadows and shaders are not limited to pro. The pro version just adds support for things that are performance tuning related like occlusion culling and diagnostics tools. That and deferred rendering, which is a desktop and console-only thing for many lights. It would be garbage if they didn't let you create a shader.

I've made maps for Quake 3 so I'm looking try and make a simple game scene with scripted events myself. The documentation is really good. No more web guides from guys who can't spell.

The main difference between Unity and Unity Pro is the featureset. Unity lacks shadows, shaders, etc. - stuff you'd need for a serious game.).

Lightmaps, shadows and shaders are not limited to pro. The pro version just adds support for things that are performance tuning related like occlusion culling and diagnostics tools. That and deferred rendering, which is a desktop and console-only thing for many lights. It would be garbage if they didn't let you create a shader.

(Speaking from 2.6 indie user, not sure what indie 3.0 has)You had lightmaps, shaders (missing a few advanced things, such as reflections, refraction ectect), and baked shadows. However you did not have advanced shaders (once again, reflections for example) and realtime shadows (both stencil and bitmap). Most of the Pro features are related to graphics, but it also had a very extensive debugging interface that showed what was eating CPU usage, graphics, and so fourth.

I'm going to have to give Unity another look. I've been dabbling about with open source projects for a while now. Panda3d and Horde3d have topped the list. I never managed to get interested in Ogre3d. With the new Blender 2.5 I've finally come to respect it as a viable modeling program. Unfortunately, getting content from Blender to all 3 of the engines mentioned above is a challenge.

In that case you might want to try the new open source OgreKit game engine. It reads Blender .blend files and extract any information, such as meshes, cameras, textures, animation, physics information and plays them directly using Ogre for graphics and Bullet for physics.

It is not Unity of course, but at least it is 100% open source under permissive Zlib/MIT/BSD licenses, the iPhone version is free and it runs on Linux.

I'm developing an indie game so this sort of news is of great interest to me. It's a racing game that blends Need For Speed with Mario Kart.

That seems to be popular right now. Aside from Blur, I know of another student indie game also doing a similar concept.

Don't take that as meaning you shouldn't do yours. Originality most often comes in all the fine details, not the grand concept. Halo, Unreal, Quake, CoD, and Bioshock are all first person shooters yet they are entirely different games.

Yes, it does seem popular. I'm not really convinced other developers are doing it right though. I want to put my own spin on things and see how it goes. There were other game types that I wanted to try first, but a racing game seemed to be the most compatible with what's out there until various game and rendering engines get their collada support updated to include animations. This whole thing mainly came out of a desire of mine to showcase my capabilities and to create something I can play with friends. Don't worry, you won't discourage me from working on this project. The real challenge is for me to bring what's in my head to life on the screen without losing things in translation.

elanthis wrote:

Quote:

I'm determined to show the world that one person can develop a polished fun single and multi-player game.

Hate to break this to you, but the world already knows this. Look at many of the IGF and IGC entries, especially in the student categories. Many of those games were done by very small teams, most ranging from 1-4 people.

Closure was done by a single kid before he even entered college. World of Goo was done by just two people. The team that did Portal was hired out of DigiPen based on their junior-project game, Narbacular Drop (same concept as Portal, just was less polished, and a different story). Likewise, Portal 2 is being worked on by the original Portal team and the DigiPen student team that did Tag. Another DigiPen team did Gear, which won the grand prize at IGC last year in the student/hobbyist bracket ($100k). Keep in mind that the DigiPen teams don't get to use any kind of pre-written engine at all, period; they write the entire game from scratch in C/C++. All over the course of a single school year, while taking 12-18 cr-hrs/semester. And they're (usually) only 3-4 people.

I never got to go to a college/university that had opportunities for creating games. That's one thing I missed out on. I even helped try to bring together some people and a professor to put together a club, but it never took off. My employer supports these types of ideas too, but I really don't want to deal with people going silent again and quietly leaving the project. I understand other people have done what I'm working on before, but I'm hoping to do something unique by doing the code, models, and music. It's a challenge and I need a challenge! It'll be fun, educational, and hopefully a hit with friends too. I want to join the elite crowd of individuals who have put together a popular game with minimal development assets.

windexglow wrote:

I modded games (warcraft3, sc2, many smaller engines) for years and transitioned to unity3D after playing with the UDK and cryengine2. Haven't gone back, the indie (free) has been extremely easy and fun for me to use.

That is also what has me working towards an indie game. I got tired of modding other peoples' games. I want my own.

erwincoumans wrote:

BigDragon wrote:

I'm going to have to give Unity another look. I've been dabbling about with open source projects for a while now. Panda3d and Horde3d have topped the list. I never managed to get interested in Ogre3d. With the new Blender 2.5 I've finally come to respect it as a viable modeling program. Unfortunately, getting content from Blender to all 3 of the engines mentioned above is a challenge.

In that case you might want to try the new open source OgreKit game engine. It reads Blender .blend files and extract any information, such as meshes, cameras, textures, animation, physics information and plays them directly using Ogre for graphics and Bullet for physics.

Thanks for the link. I will take a look! I really want to use Bullet since I've got some excellent samples to reference. They're critical for me since I learn best by example and tinkering. Ogre still never managed to hit my radar. I understand it was used for Torchlight though. Perhaps this project will get me more interested. I'm already liking that I see recent updates and Blender 2.5 support.

As windexglow pointed out there were relatively substantial differences between free and pro version of 2.6 (esp. realtime shadows) and at a glance it seems that version 3 widens this gap. For instance the new audio effects, debugger and more is pro version only.

Interesting to know about the updates to unity, as an indie developer starting out the price tag terrified me! I decided to stick with 2D to start and have been using the Cocos 2D library for Xcode. Those interested in starting out in iphone game development I strongly recommend checking it out, there's plenty of documentation and a robust online community. One of the latest massively popular iphone games "stunt biker" was built by one guy using Cocs 2D.

My mistake about the realtime shadows in Unity basic. That's a shame but it wouldn't be an issue if you were making mobile games, since you'd use a blob shadow anyway.

Anyway, $1500 for a 3D/development app of this complexity and power is not a lot. It looks like a big number. I think the total cost of my 3rd-party Maya plug-ins was more and I don't have many. Go pick up Houdini Master and Realflow and then Unity Pro starts to look really cheap

I'm developing an indie game so this sort of news is of great interest to me. It's a racing game that blends Need For Speed with Mario Kart. So far I have a car ready to go and have been looking for an engine to use that isn't as convoluted as XNA seemed. I'm determined to show the world that one person can develop a polished fun single and multi-player game. I want to debut the game at a LAN party I visit. While I hunt for a viable engine I've been doing more modeling and even learning to make music. I have an older version of Unity and will do some more research on this new version.

If I may offer some advice I would suggest that you focus on getting a game working as rapidly as possible, rather than spend months on creating detailed art assets, writing shaders, etc. Aim extremely low in terms of visual quality and put all of your energies into perfecting balanced, responsive, controls then physics, then AI with an "optimatched" lobby which allows players of different ranks to play against each other with handicaps (whether that be different car manufacturers, tweaks like Nitrous, or what "power-ups" are visible to players). You can always go back and improve the graphics in later versions of the software, but flat triangles are ok to start with. Just take a look at this video:

A lot of people complain about the "huge differences" between the free and Pro versions and cite things like realtime shadows. Shadows? Yeah cool whatever. I'm more concerned about the fact that there is NO way to make ANY kind of version control work effectively with the free version. The asset pipeline is very fragile and does not synchronize well. It doesn't matter what tool you use. SVN, Mercurial, Dropbox, Unity breaks against ALL of them. The Pro version's "external version control" is literally FIXING the asset pipeline to not break. It's ridiculous and anyone trying to collaborate on a free project is basically boned.